Are Smart Countries Richer or Are Rich Countries Smarter?

Untangling the relationship between national average IQ and wealth creation

Do higher IQs produce wealth, or does wealth produce higher IQs? This is the question that Ron Unz grapples with in his fascinating article, "Race, IQ, and Wealth: How Political Bias Distorts the Facts." Unz, publisher of The American Conservative, is taking on claims made in the 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations that differences in national IQ account for the substantial variation in national per capita income.

The authors, emeritus University of Ulster psychologist Richard Lynn and emeritus University of Tampere political scientist Tatu Vanhanen, sought out IQ data they believe could plausibly measure the average IQs of the people of various nations and then correlated it with GDP per capita. Their conclusion is that countries populated with smarter people are the ones that become wealthier. Countries inhabited by stupid people remain mired in poverty. Lynn and Vanhanen further conclude that the connection between IQ and wealth is causal based on studies that show for individuals that “IQs measured in childhood are strong predictors of IQs in adolescence and these are strong predictors of earnings in adulthood.” They then generalize, “From this it follows that groups with high IQs would have higher average incomes than groups with low IQs because groups are aggregates of individuals.”

In his article, Unz uses the data collected by Lynn and Vanhanen and argues that they actually show the opposite—that rising wealth boosts intelligence. In order to avoid getting stuck in the quagmire of race, Unz looks only at the IQ data for European populations. All of the data are adjusted for the universal Flynn effect in which average IQ scores have been increasing in the modern age by 2 to 3 points per decade depending on which IQ measure is used. The data are standardized such that the average British IQ at any time is set at 100.

Let’s look at Germany. Lynn and Vanhanen cited four studies that found that West German IQ scores ranged from 99 to 107, whereas East German IQs were as low as 90 back in 1967, and later studies pegged their scores at 97 to 99 points. Taking the extremes, these data imply a gap as big as 17 IQ points between West and East Germans. How to account for the rise East Germany in less than a generation of 7 to 9 points? After all, East and West Germans are not all that genetically different. Lynn’s data now show an average German IQ of 102 points.

Similarly Lynn and Vanhanen report that average Greek IQs were 88 in 1961 rising to 95 in 1979. An increase of 7 IQ points in 18 years, as Unz points out, “is an absurdity from the genetic perspective.” Some other data uncovered by Lynn and Vanhanen found that Croatians tested as low as 90; Bulgarians at 91; Romanians at 94; Poles at 92; and Southern Italians (Sicilians) at 89. Whereas Lynn and Vanhanen report that Northern Europeans—West Germans, British, Belgian, Dutch, Austrians, and Norwegians—tended to test at 100 points or above.

Consider the case of the Irish where Lynn and Vanhanen report a 1972 study that found the average IQ of Irish children was 87 points, the lowest figure anywhere in Europe. In fact, his realization that the Irish suffered from low intelligence appears to have been something of a eureka moment for Lynn. In a 2011 interview with the journal Personality and Individual Differences, Lynn said, “So I formulated the theory that the low IQ was likely a significant reason for the economic backwardness.” He added, “The solution for this problem was obvious. What was needed was a set of eugenic policies that would raise the Irish IQ.” However, Lynn forbore making his conclusions public because as he explained, “Virtually no-one supported eugenic programs any more and anyone who proposed doing so would be accused of being a Nazi.” Seems likely.

As a check on the notion of genetically fixed national IQs, Unz takes a look at how well the descendants of various immigrant groups have done in the United States. The fear that Anglo-Saxon America was being overwhelmed by the wretched refuse of Europe motivated the publication of the classic 1922 anti-immigration screed by Saturday Evening Post correspondent Kenneth Roberts, Why Europe Leaves Home: A True Account of the Reasons which Cause Central Europeans to Overrun America. As Roberts explained, “After 1880 the Nordic immigration was overwhelmed by the backward, unassimilatable, undesirable immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe.” Inspired in part by Roberts’ book, Congress passed the highly restrictive 1924 Immigration Act. Unz points out that in his 1978 book, American Ethnic Groups, Stanford University economist Thomas Sowell summarized 1920s data on average IQ scores for various Eastern and Southern European groups. Slovaks scored an average of 85; Greeks 83; Poles 85; Spaniards 78; and Italian scores ranged between 78 and 85. It is unlikely that these immigrants were drawn from the IQ elites of their homelands.

Accepting that higher IQs and higher incomes go together, Unz notes, “Americans of Greek and South Slav origins are considerably above most other American whites in both family income and educational level.” Similarly Americans who trace their ancestry back to Italy are very close to average in income and education. The descendants of the Catholic Irish immigrants, described by 19th century nativists as “low-browed and savage, groveling and bestial, lazy and wild, simian and sensual” have, as Unz observes, “within less than a century had become wealthier and better educated than the average white American, including those of ‘Old Stock’ ancestry.” Old Stock means earlier British, German, and Dutch immigrants.

Unz points out that as countries in Europe have become wealthier since World War II, their average IQ scores have risen. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development under its Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) administers every three years a test to 15-year olds in developed and some undeveloped countries. On the 2009 data, the Irish now outscore the British on reading and are very close on math and science. The Poles outscore the British on reading and math and are very close on science. Croatian reading scores are how higher than Austrian scores and very close on math and science.

Income trends clearly track these increases in test scores in the European countries identified as having low average IQs by Lynn and Vanhanen. For example, since 1970 Irish real per capita incomes (2005 dollars) increased from $11,000 to $43,000. Polish incomes are up from $3,000 to nearly $10,000; Croatian incomes rose from $4,000 to $11,000. The genetic compositions of European populations do not change much in a generation, but clearly incomes do.

Unz goes on to parse the implications for the current American immigration debate, particularly focusing on nativist concerns about millions of recent Mexican immigrants. Lynn and Vanhanen estimate the average Mexican IQ at 87 points. Recall this is the same score that Lynn and Vanhanen reported for Irish children back in 1972. Unz observes, “Mexicans and Irish seem to have the same intellectual ability, and since the Irish have generally done well in American society, there seems no particular reason to assume that Mexicans will not.”

In fact, using data from the Wordsum test in the General Social Survey (GSS) that correlates fairly well with IQ, Unz reports the IQ scores of second generation Mexican Americans have likely risen a full 10 points in the past 20 years. In addition, he notes that in 1975 only 6 percent of Hispanic students took the SAT; now 32 percent do. However, the difference between white and Hispanic scores did not widen. “Since the white/Hispanic gap remained unchanged during this tremendous broadening of the Hispanic testing pool rather than greatly widening, the only possible explanation would seem to be a huge rise in average Hispanic academic performance,” concludes Unz. Mexican Americans will assimilate as completely into American society as earlier ethnic groups have done.

So why are IQ scores going up around the world? Certainly, better childhood nutrition, more schooling, and most intriguingly, fewer childhood diseases could account for the Flynn Effect, the recent steady 3 point per decade rise in IQ test scores. Unz further speculates that urbanization dramatically boosts intelligence. Earlier waves of immigrants to the United States chiefly became farmers but in the 20th century immigrants from largely rural areas of Europe moved to cities. Unz notes that Dutch-Americans, German-Americans, and Old Stock whites who no longer identify with any European country tend to be more rural. They also perform worse on the GSS Wordsum-IQ test than do Americans whose ancestors hail more recently from Ireland, Greece, the Balkans, and Italy. A big gap in performance on the Wordsum test continues to exist today between white Americans who grew up on farms and those who grew up in suburbs and cities. In 1900 only 14 percent of the world’s population lived in cities; today 50 percent do and by 2100 projections estimate that 80 percent will. So if urbanization boosts IQ, that’s good news for the world.

Unz acknowledges the possibility that different European ethnic groups might have small differences in innate intelligence, but “this residual genetic element would explain merely a small fraction of the huge 10-15 IQ disparities” seen in the Lynn and Vanhanen data.

The really interesting question is what is responsible for producing both wealth and higher IQs? One clue: Wealth and IQ correlate very nicely with the index of economic freedom. History teaches that economic freedom precedes the increase of both wealth and IQ. Even the data collected by Lynn and Vanhanen clearly show that when the dead hand of communism was lifted from Eastern Europe, both wealth and IQs began rising. Before the institutions of liberty arose in the late 18th century, every people and every nation lived in humanity’s natural state of poverty and ignorance. The bottom line is that liberty makes people richer and smarter.

Disclosure: With reference to the urban/rural IQ issue, I grew up on a dairy farm in Southwestern Virginia.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Only white hermaphrodites with IQs below 70 can be entrusted with creating prosperous societies.

    I have a set of statistics that proves it.

  • Flemur||

    Unz's shot at reviving blank-slatism is taken apart here:

    http://hbdchick.wordpress.com/tag/ron-unz/

    "The East Asians are indeed an anomaly for Mr. Unz’s environmentalist theory. The IQ in impoverished China is the same as that in affluent Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, and South Korea. But Mr. Unz is wrong in his assertion that the high IQs of the East Asians despite depressed socio-economic conditions are an exception. ...
    In our 2012 compilation we give a median IQ of 97.2 for ten former communist countries and a median IQ of 99 for 14 countries of northern and central western Europe. This negligible difference of 1.8 IQ points indicates that the depressed socio-economic conditions of eastern Europe had virtually no adverse impact on their national IQs."

    Etc.

  • Ron Bailey||

    Flemur: Blank-slatism? Not hardly - just not hard genetic determinism. The Flynn effect by itself strongly indicates that environmental influences have profound effects on IQ scores. Genes are, after all, largely machines for making proteins in response to environmental cues. It's both nature and nurture.

    What's interesting about the claims with regard to how smart East Asians are, is that those countries remained desperately poor until their authoritarian traditional cultures were smashed and communism abated. The institutions of liberty, not raw smarts, make all the difference.

    With regard to the former Communist countries in Europe, I note that Lynn himself says that the "average IQ in the Balkans given in our 2012 book is 92, and therefore about 7 IQ points lower than that in central and northern Europe."

    I will take this opportunity to recommend that readers may want to wander over to VDare.com (see link above) to read Lynn's attempt at refuting Unz. I think it unsuccessful which is why I wrote the column, but you can make up your own minds.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Lynn is a normative retard. I'd like to see a heavyweight like Jensen or Greg Cochran respond.

    Here's Peter Frost's, who commented on an unpublished draft, review. Here's a later back forth with Frost and Unz.

  • Sidd Finch||

    What's interesting about the claims with regard to how smart East Asians are, is that those countries remained desperately poor until their authoritarian traditional cultures were smashed and communism abated. The institutions of liberty, not raw smarts, make all the difference.

    What's also interesting is that there aren't any other examples of wealth increase of the sort East Asian countries experience in the last fifty years. Surely those weren't the only countries whose institutions improved over that time frame.

  • Ron Bailey||

    SF: Actually, the institutions of Eastern Europe did change 20 years ago and incomes have on average doubled since then. With regard to the speed of growth in East Asian countries, it is much easier to do that starting from a low base once the institutional changes (a modicum of liberty) have taken place.

    I strongly suspect that Chinese economic growth will slow down considerably by the end of this decade. Note also that the Japanese economic growth rate has been lower on average than the U.S. rate for quite some time now.

  • Sidd Finch||

    There's "a modicum of liberty" all over South America and Africa. Yet De Beers governs the only not-totally-depressing Blafrican country and the GDP per capita of South American countries is obviously in rank-order of Spanishness.

  • Ron Bailey||

    SF: Actually, I would argue that almost no countries in either Africa or Latin America have achieved and sustained the modicum of liberty required to spark the production of wealth. Traditional kleptocratic authoritarianism is the general rule for most countries in those regions. However, countries that have established a "modicum of liberty" are doing pretty well with regard to producing wealth, e.g. Chile and Brazil in Latin America, and Botswana in Africa.

  • Flemur||

    Blank-slatism - yup, that's what they're selling.

    Here's another take-down - from people Unz gave money to (Cochran and Harpending):

    Data? We Don’t Need No Data

  • JenniferB||

    Mr. Bailey, does your open-borders, NWO vision for the future include any white children?

    Mass immigration plus forced assimilation will lead inexorably to white extinction. This is happening in every white country and only white countries. Mexico is much richer than Somalia but no one is telling the Mexicans they should pay taxes to resettle Somalis and other poor Africans in Mexico until they are reduced to a minority in their own country.

    It seems to be only white children who are to wiped off the face of the Earth by mass immigration and forced integation.

    Why do you push policies that will result in the elimination of white people? Are you anti-white or something?

  • Sidd Finch||

    Unz has been trying to make sense of the stability of East Asian IQ since he was a college freshman.

  • Adam330||

    I wonder how much of this is 1) the IQ tests measuring schooling, rather than raw intelligence, and 2) more schooling in high income societies.

  • The Derider||

    I think you've got the answer in a nutshell.

    IQ is not fixed at birth, it is positively correlated with education level.

    Rich countries spend more on education, which makes their population smarter, which makes the country richer...

  • Sidd Finch||

    That explains why DC's public schools are among the best in the world.

  • Brutus||

    And the US is the planet's educational leader.

  • The Derider||

    Clearly there are diminishing returns in education spending--and how the money is spent matters as well.

    There's still an obvious distinction between the education funding and outcomes in industrialized economies and those in developing countries.

  • Brutus||

    "Diminishing returns" would be indicated by a relatively flat or zero slope on a spending-vs-achievement plot. What we have with virtually every big-city school district (DC, New York, Chicago, LA, etc.) is a negative slope. This indicates that, if causation exists, that the extra money is actively making kids stupider.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Well, to be fair, it isn't all that clear that big city public school spending is spending on education, rather than simply an income transfer to the teachers unions.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Perhaps you've heard of an emerging, eclectic field called "economics." These rogue theoreticians hypothesize that higher salaries should provide better, not worse, employees.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    And that will always come to pass under conditions of fixed long-term contracts and pre-negotiated suppliers? I guess you must have read a different economics textbook than I did.

  • Ron Bailey||

    SF: Higher salaries provide better employees only when there is competition, not a government mandated monopoly.

  • Bill||

    And much of the money goes to administrators and not teachers. Thus the negative correlation between money spent and student performance.

  • M||

    There's still an obvious distinction between the education funding and outcomes in industrialized economies and those in developing countries

    There is no "obvious distinction". You are claiming, based on no facts and no reasoning, that outcomes in developing countries lag behind those in "industrialized economies" and that this is all the evidence needed to disprove the possibility of group IQ differences.

    And it does nothing of the sort.

  • The Derider||

    DC public schools vs schools in rich, industrialized societies? DC sucks.

    DC public schools vs schools in the 3rd world? DC wins.

  • hk||

    Even socialists are coming around to the fact that public schools suck.

    The government doesn't have magical powers, nothing it does in schools will change that.

  • Sidd Finch||

    http://super-economy.blogspot......nding.html

    correlation between spending and PISA scores among OECD countries: -.22

    correlation between spending and PISA scores, non-hispanic whites only: +.18

  • ||

    The link is idiotic.

    Conservatives are not calling to spend less on education. They are calling for that money to be spent on vouchers and charter schools and to fire crappy teachers and set teacher pay scales to performance.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Let's be clear here. You're calling a blog post by a UChicago Phd economist idiotic, and you have a specific criteria, "Conservatives are not calling to spend less on education," that isn't supported one iota by the post. IIRC One of the recently departed had a name for the commenters who peddle this sort of right wing anti-intellectual retardation.

  • ||

    Rich countries spend more on education

    So money makes a difference.

    Hmm almost sounds like we should pay good teachers more then bad teachers and do away with teacher unions.

    That would you being pawned joe.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Great idea. Now define "good teacher."

    [without blank slate dribble]

  • Sidd Finch||

    are dribble and drivel close enough to count as homonyms?

  • M||

    I wonder how much of this is 1) the IQ tests measuring schooling, rather than raw intelligence, and 2) more schooling in high income societies.

    Very little, as can be seen by the difference in IQ and academic performance of difference groups of people within the United States. It is very obvious in the year 2012 that no amount of money sent on schools can turn blacks into whites, or Hispanics into Jews.

  • ||

    IQ tests are practically meaningless. Neither Lynn's nor Unz's conclusions are worth the paper they're written on.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Said not one private-sector hiring manager, ever.

  • Jules||

    Tests are meaningless? Tell that to Harvard Professor of psychology Steven Pinker:

    "To study something scientifically, you first have to measure it, and psychologists have developed tests for many mental traits. And contrary to popular opinion, the tests work pretty well: they give a similar measurement of a person every time they are administered, and they statistically predict life outcomes like school and job performance, psychiatric diagnoses and marital stability....

    The most prominent finding of behavioral genetics has been summarized by the psychologist Eric Turkheimer: “The nature-nurture debate is over. . . . All human behavioral traits are heritable.” By this he meant that a substantial fraction of the variation among individuals within a culture can be linked to variation in their genes. Whether you measure intelligence or personality, religiosity or political orientation, television watching or cigarette smoking, the outcome is the same. Identical twins (who share all their genes) are more similar than fraternal twins (who share half their genes that vary among people). Biological siblings (who share half those genes too) are more similar than adopted siblings (who share no more genes than do strangers). And identical twins separated at birth and raised in different adoptive homes (who share their genes but not their environments) are uncannily similar."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01.....wanted=all

  • jason||

    One thing is sure smartness come with the money nothing to say after this.

  • Bill||

    WTF??

  • Bill Dalasio||

    I can't help but wonder why the logical place to draw a distinction in this discussion is the nation-state. If the underlying theory holds, wouldn't it follow that, in the U.S., income differentials between local populations (say at the state or city level) should also be explainable by differentials in the inate intelligence? So, then, should we assume that people in say New England or, particularly, the Mid-Atlantic region (areas notably populated with descendents of Southern and Eastern Europeans) are intellectually superior to those in, say, the South or Midwest? Also, wouldn't the recent gains registered in, say, Texas, likely reflect the inate intellectual superiority of their recent immigrants?

  • Ron Bailey||

    BD: You have opened a can of worms - some researchers have in fact tried to slice U.S. data in just the ways you suggest.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Ugh! Sometimes sarcasm is lost on reality.

  • analog2000||

    Absolutely! Why not bring it all the way down to an individual level? Richer people are inherently more intelligent! Actors and athletes with their multi-million dollar salaries are the smartest of us all! (sarcasm - in case that isn't clear!)

  • analog2000||

    All of this is based on the idea that IQ tests mean anything! They don't. IQ scores are dependent on a thousand factors discussed here (education, nutrition, etc.), but we should also question what meaning the scores have in the first place.

    Do we really believe that a test can determine someone's innate intelligence or ability to learn? Who writes the tests? How do they choose the questions? What type of privilege goes into that? Can the tests really be given across different cultures? People who are the product of industrialized western nations write the tests! Clearly that will skew the results when the test is given to someone in the third world.

    I took an IQ test once. One of the sections was on vocabulary words. What if I wasn't a native English speaker? Or if I wasn't raised in an environment that used "big words?" Another section had you make things out of blocks. What if you weren't familiar with that kind of thing? Like the way new puzzle games are confusing the first few times, but with a little practice you are much better at it. It is clear that IQ test results and culture/education are tied together.

  • ||

    FREEDOM yes, reasonably obvious. After all, the entire world had roughly the same smarts wealth and income, and it was rather low compared to today, until things started to change about 400 years ago, first in England then gradually spreading. The change was not genetic nor the result of a technology nor a new gold field, it was cultural and institutional, with roots reaching back quite a way but with the change affecting significant parts of national populations only fairly recently, beginning between the English Civil War and the end of the Napoleonic wars, by which time the first real world-dominating empire, that of Britain, had arisen.

  • Ardelle||

    Lynn and Vanhanen further conclude that the connection between IQ and wealth is causal based on studies that show for individuals that “IQs measured in childhood are strong predictors of IQs in adolescence and these are strong predictors of earnings in adulthood.” They then generalize, “From this it follows that groups with high IQs would have higher average incomes than groups with lo

  • M||

    "in his article, Unz uses the data collected by Lynn and Vanhanen and argues that they actually show the opposite—that rising wealth boosts intelligence."

    Actually, no. The point of Unz' piece is to argue that we need not worry about the low IQ of Hispanics having an adverse impact on America, because (he argues) the IQ of Hispanics will rise in a generation of two.

    All his discussion of IQ is aimed at this one point. And he fails badly in this task.

    Similarly Lynn and Vanhanen report that average Greek IQs were 88 in 1961 rising to 95 in 1979.

    This is incorrect, Lynn and Vanhanen report no such thing. This is Unz interpretation of the the data provided by Lynn and Vanhanen. It is not an interpretation which they share, and it is not an interpretation which can withstand any serious scrutiny.

    using data from the Wordsum test in the General Social Survey (GSS) that correlates fairly well with IQ, Unz reports the IQ scores of second generation Mexican Americans have likely risen a full 10 points in the past 20 years.

    Unz does attempt to make that claim, but as is so often the case with him, he is wrong. Everybody else who has looked at the wordsum data has been unable to see in it what Unz sees.

  • M||

    Do we really believe that a test can determine someone's innate intelligence or ability to learn?

    Yes, we do. We also believe that the Earth revolves around the Sun, that a persons eye color is an hereditary trait, and all sorts of other things which are scientific facts even if completely unknown to you.

  • M||

    Lynn and Vanhanen estimate the average Mexican IQ at 87 points. Recall this is the same score that Lynn and Vanhanen reported for Irish children back in 1972.

    That is a factual untruth. I won't go so fat as to call it lie, though it is a lie when Ron Unz says it. I'm willing to assume that Bailey simply does not know any better. While Lynn and Vanhanen did estimate the Mexican-American IQ as 87, they did NOT report that same number for Irish children in 1972.

    Mexican Americans will assimilate as completely into American society as earlier ethnic groups have done.

    This is a statement of libertarian religious belief. It has no factual basis, and indeed every scrap of evidence we have indicates that it is a false belief. Mexicans in America will "assimilate as completely into American society" as African Americans have done. Not very.

  • Jules||

    1. One of the curious things is that East Asian countries such as China appear to have held relatively steady. Unz himself has written a paper "Preliminary notes on the possible sociobiological implications of the rural Chinese economy", which attempts to explain this.

    http://infoproc.blogspot.co.nz.....ns-of.html

    2. Also, as Joel Schneider Garrett Jones point out in their paper "IQ in the Production Function", scores in oil rich Middle Eastern states have not really changed despite their prosperity.

    http://mason.gmu.edu/~gjonesb/Immigrant IQ

    3. If you look at the Occidentalist blog post on "Hispanic “Flynn Effect” in the NAEP " it's not that clear the 3rd generation are doing that much better despite improved SES on PISA, TIMMS type measures.

    4. Steven Pinker has noted that Unz may have misinterpreted Lynn's argument as being entirely genetic, when Lynn himself acknowledges the importance of nutrition as a factor in low scores. As Pinker notes, Rushton Jensen find that controlling for socio-economic factors with african americans european americans there is still a gap.

  • Jules||

    I would be interested in Jason Richwine's take on this too. He had an article a couple of years ago noting that assimilation rates for Hispanic groups were quite different to the waves of 100 years ago.

    It appears to stall after the second generation. We see little further ladder-climbing from the grandchildren of Hispanic immigrants. They do not rise out of the lower class.

    ...

    These results do not depend on the time period considered. Economists Jeffrey Grogger and Stephen Trejo reached the same conclusions when they used CPS data from the mid-1990s for a similar analysis of Mexican Americans. And other datasets tell the same story. One study reported results from the Latino National Political Survey, conducted in 1989 and 1990. Among its striking findings was that the percentage of Mexican-American households with incomes higher than $50,000 rose from 7 percent in the first generation to 11 percent in the second. But the same statistic in the third and fourth generations stayed at 11 percent, at a time when the national rate was 24 percent. Another study, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, began tracking a representative sample of young Americans in 1979. By 1993, the Hispanic 3+ generations in that sample had, if anything, slightly worse outcomes than the second generation in terms of wages, educational attainment, and cognitive test scores."

    http://tinyurl.com/7vq6tch

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement